Myself and Conor thought it would be best if we asked someone outside of our media class, who does not study media to give us feedback about our production. We asked Emily because she has not studied media therefore we thought it would be beneficial to get an outside opionion of our production.
Overall she believed our production was very good, and believed it seemed like a professional product and realistic too. The first point she made was with regards to our CCTV shots which she recognised straight away due to the distorted view and the time code at the top of the frame.
Emily also believed the music worked well with the different scenes and she also mentioned, the best thing about the music was the genre and the mood it created. She explained it was music you would expect to hear in a similar style of documentary which we were pleased to hear.
She also mentioned in her feedback the reconstruction. She believed it was placed in at a good time in the documentary and she felt it was a good addition to the production, along with the different shots in and around the car.
Emily's final positive point gave relevance to the establishing shots around Hertford and the scenes of Margaret Evans inside her home. She explained to us that the tension inside of the house worked very well and gave the documentary a very realistic feel to it. Whereas with the establishing shots she believed we framed our shots well and got a good variety of shots to enhance our production.
Although she managed to point out many advantages she believed there was one point which she felt 'spoilt' her experience and viewing of our production. She explained to us that she could hear the sound of the microphone moving in one of the scenes which myself and Conor had been aware of and are trying to fix it. Therefore we know that we need to rectify this problem to enhance our production even further.
However overall Emily said she thought our production was very good with special relevance to the 'huge' variety of shots ad the balance between narrating, acting and reconstruction worked very well. She also 'loved' the music as she felt this gave it a new dimension and brought the whole production together.
Monday, 17 January 2011
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
Editing
During recent editing myself and Conor decided it would be good to include a timescale on the CCTV shots, to enhance its resemblence of the type of shot. There is a timescle already on adobe which we tried to use however it was not the same as what we wanted, as this timescale started from zero, like a stopwatch. Where the one we had in mind was to be an ongoing time, to see what time of the night Michael went missing. Therefore we used the text tool, and entered a time and date, and we have to replicate this many times and layer the text on our timeline so it was an ongoing time.
However once we had done this we noticed we had the same font for every one, even though we have different types of CCTV shot, therefore we had to change the fonts slightly, so that they still looked realistic but were not the same. This took some time as I felt there was not many fonts which gave it the CCTV shot look to it and we are currently still contemplating on one of the fonts.
Sunday, 5 December 2010
Editing
In the last week myself and Conor took the feedback notes from our teachers into consideration and altereed our production. We have done this because in the next few days they will be giving us final points of improvement.
Therefore we wanted to enhance our production as much as possible to recieve great feedback. We started by changing the transcript we had at the bottom of our frame whilst the police phone call was happening because it did not match the speech exactly. There was not much to change as it was only a couple of words which did not take long at all therefore this was rectified very easily.
Myself and Conor had been informed that our main title font and layout could be improved as it was not appropriate for the target audience. However we were aware of this as we had already found our font on the internet which we were going to use and i have previously published with regards to this. Therefore we saved the font on our memory pens and it is now in place as our title and I am happy with the way it looks.
There were also a couple of issues according to our teachers with regards to the audio. Firstly it was made known that we should think about softening the start of the mum's speech as it comes in quite loud and direct. We spent a few minutes consulting and deciding what we should do to soften it, and in the end we opted for an audio transition so the audio level gradually gets louder as she starts talking and I feel this has been effective as I believe it sounds more in place now.
In our last lesson we also found out that we needed to lower the audio level of most of our production which wasnt too easy as we have many different parts and sections to our documentary, however we spent about 30 minutes lowering the audio level to a more suitable level and I have also noticed the difference as it sounds more suttle and flows more.
With regards to the positive comments, it was made known that our transitions were very effective and work very well, the pace of the documentary is great and our teacher believes we have used a good amount of different locations and different filming styles which I am happy about.
Overall I believe editing has been very successful so far and I consider our documentary to be coming along very well and is near to a finished product.
Therefore we wanted to enhance our production as much as possible to recieve great feedback. We started by changing the transcript we had at the bottom of our frame whilst the police phone call was happening because it did not match the speech exactly. There was not much to change as it was only a couple of words which did not take long at all therefore this was rectified very easily.
Myself and Conor had been informed that our main title font and layout could be improved as it was not appropriate for the target audience. However we were aware of this as we had already found our font on the internet which we were going to use and i have previously published with regards to this. Therefore we saved the font on our memory pens and it is now in place as our title and I am happy with the way it looks.
There were also a couple of issues according to our teachers with regards to the audio. Firstly it was made known that we should think about softening the start of the mum's speech as it comes in quite loud and direct. We spent a few minutes consulting and deciding what we should do to soften it, and in the end we opted for an audio transition so the audio level gradually gets louder as she starts talking and I feel this has been effective as I believe it sounds more in place now.
In our last lesson we also found out that we needed to lower the audio level of most of our production which wasnt too easy as we have many different parts and sections to our documentary, however we spent about 30 minutes lowering the audio level to a more suitable level and I have also noticed the difference as it sounds more suttle and flows more.
With regards to the positive comments, it was made known that our transitions were very effective and work very well, the pace of the documentary is great and our teacher believes we have used a good amount of different locations and different filming styles which I am happy about.
Overall I believe editing has been very successful so far and I consider our documentary to be coming along very well and is near to a finished product.
Friday, 26 November 2010
Feedback from Mrs Allison
Feedback notes from Mrs Allison
Documentary opening Conor O’Sullivan and Andrew Lloyd-Jones
• Subtitles on telephone conversation should be lower case
• Transcript isn’t quite the same as speech
• Main title font and layout could be improved - not appropriate for target audience?
• Conor’s voice over is good but worth a try with an older sounding voice to get more authority
• Soften the start of the mum’s speech – to harsh
• Mic noise on mum’s speech
• Transitions between sections work very well
• Pace is great
• Very good use of different locations and filming styles
• Poster not obvious enough – close-up then zoom out ?
• Rather than screwed up what about blowing in the wind for final shot – more movement
Documentary opening Conor O’Sullivan and Andrew Lloyd-Jones
• Subtitles on telephone conversation should be lower case
• Transcript isn’t quite the same as speech
• Main title font and layout could be improved - not appropriate for target audience?
• Conor’s voice over is good but worth a try with an older sounding voice to get more authority
• Soften the start of the mum’s speech – to harsh
• Mic noise on mum’s speech
• Transitions between sections work very well
• Pace is great
• Very good use of different locations and filming styles
• Poster not obvious enough – close-up then zoom out ?
• Rather than screwed up what about blowing in the wind for final shot – more movement
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
Editing
Yesterday myself and Conor learnt how to choose more precise effects whilst editing our production. We both previously knew how to put transitions and effects into our production, however we found out that there is a setting where you can go into the effect with more detail and choose how you want it specifically.
We decided that our CCTV shots could be improved to give the whole night and camera feel to it. Therefore we have come to the conclusion that it would be best if we mix and match with regards to the colour of the shots, therefore we will use some black and white shots and some coloured ones. However we felt that we needed an effect which gave the shots more of a CCTV look to them. Therefore we have been playing around with the different effects and seeing which one gives the best feel for a CCTV shot. In the picture above, we had added the 'noise' effect which we were setting at about 28% which we feel was enough and gave it the whole distorted and blurry look to it, which we were happy with.
We decided that our CCTV shots could be improved to give the whole night and camera feel to it. Therefore we have come to the conclusion that it would be best if we mix and match with regards to the colour of the shots, therefore we will use some black and white shots and some coloured ones. However we felt that we needed an effect which gave the shots more of a CCTV look to them. Therefore we have been playing around with the different effects and seeing which one gives the best feel for a CCTV shot. In the picture above, we had added the 'noise' effect which we were setting at about 28% which we feel was enough and gave it the whole distorted and blurry look to it, which we were happy with.
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Feedback from first rough cut
In class we each had a piece of paper to fill in with regards to other peoples productions so far.
I have tried to scan these onto the computer to post onto the blog to give the feedback a more visualised effort, however the scanner does not seem to be working at the moment, although i will keep trying to see if it works.
The pieces of paper given to us had listed twelve technical skills which were expected to be seen in each production, therefore there were also columns named 'no evidence', 'some evidence' and 'clear evidence'. Out of the three people who gave us feedback not one of them ticked the 'no evidence' box, which I am happy about, as this means our production is moving in the right direction and we have displayed at least a hint of all of the technical skills needed.
The first person's feedback featured what i feel were very generous comments as they ticked ten 'clear evidence' boxes and two 'some evidence boxes. Although this felt good to recieve such positive information, i felt it could have been a bit more realistic which would have been better. They also made it clear that they thought it would be better to remove the 'Hertford' caption however myself and Conor have spoke briefly about this i we feel it would be better to keep it. They also went on to say our panning shots were 'excellent' and that the mise en scene was 'brilliant' in which we are happy to hear. The last bit of feedback they gave us was they they felt that it would be better to not cut to a close up of the photo of Matthew Evans as it is not suttle.
The second person to give us feedback wasn't so generous and ticked seven 'clear evidence' boxes and five 'some evidence' boxes. This made me think that this person may have looked into our production with more detail which we appreciated. Amongst the five 'some evidence' boxes they ticked the same as one of the previous people which was 'hold a shot steady when appropriate' which made us think we need to look into this more as it had been higlighted by two people and infact the third person to give feedback also ticked this.
This person also highlighted that there was only slight evidence with regards to transitions. However we are not too concerned about this at the moment as we feel the transitions should be put in place towards the very end of editing to make it all come together as a complete piece.
The last bit of constructive critism was that the shots we filmed inside the car were a bit too 'shakey' and that the text could be improved. Since this was made clear to us myself and Conor have refilmed the shots inside the car and we are much happier with how they are now. We were also aware that the text we had used was not going to be our final text, we just placed it there as a template to see what it would look like first.
The last person to give us feedback was our teacher and as expected, they picked up on many more points for improvement. They ticked four 'some evidence' boxes and six 'clear evidence' boxes with two in the middle of both. This was positive as we knew the teachers feedback would be most important and most of the boxes ticked were 'clear evidence'. Our teacher repeated what had been said already with regards to the transistions and the titles, and also the steady shot when appropriate, however they also touched on some other points. These included we needed a close up of the poster, which we were unsure about as other documentarys we had looked at did not show a close up, however we will review the situation soon. Also it was made clear that when Jamie is driving the car, his voice needs to be made louder, which we can easily adjust when we are editing. The last piece of feedback to improve was the titles and how they are positioned, which yet again we were aware of and was waiting to get the font off of the internet and putting it in place towards the end of editing to finish off.
However there was some positives which were taken out of this as our teacher felt the music 'works well' and is 'effective', which we felt too and are very happy with.
Overall we feel the rough cut feedback has given us some much needed information and guidance, and we believe we now know what we need to do in order to complete our production and to hopefully improve it.
I have tried to scan these onto the computer to post onto the blog to give the feedback a more visualised effort, however the scanner does not seem to be working at the moment, although i will keep trying to see if it works.
The pieces of paper given to us had listed twelve technical skills which were expected to be seen in each production, therefore there were also columns named 'no evidence', 'some evidence' and 'clear evidence'. Out of the three people who gave us feedback not one of them ticked the 'no evidence' box, which I am happy about, as this means our production is moving in the right direction and we have displayed at least a hint of all of the technical skills needed.
The first person's feedback featured what i feel were very generous comments as they ticked ten 'clear evidence' boxes and two 'some evidence boxes. Although this felt good to recieve such positive information, i felt it could have been a bit more realistic which would have been better. They also made it clear that they thought it would be better to remove the 'Hertford' caption however myself and Conor have spoke briefly about this i we feel it would be better to keep it. They also went on to say our panning shots were 'excellent' and that the mise en scene was 'brilliant' in which we are happy to hear. The last bit of feedback they gave us was they they felt that it would be better to not cut to a close up of the photo of Matthew Evans as it is not suttle.
The second person to give us feedback wasn't so generous and ticked seven 'clear evidence' boxes and five 'some evidence' boxes. This made me think that this person may have looked into our production with more detail which we appreciated. Amongst the five 'some evidence' boxes they ticked the same as one of the previous people which was 'hold a shot steady when appropriate' which made us think we need to look into this more as it had been higlighted by two people and infact the third person to give feedback also ticked this.
This person also highlighted that there was only slight evidence with regards to transitions. However we are not too concerned about this at the moment as we feel the transitions should be put in place towards the very end of editing to make it all come together as a complete piece.
The last bit of constructive critism was that the shots we filmed inside the car were a bit too 'shakey' and that the text could be improved. Since this was made clear to us myself and Conor have refilmed the shots inside the car and we are much happier with how they are now. We were also aware that the text we had used was not going to be our final text, we just placed it there as a template to see what it would look like first.
The last person to give us feedback was our teacher and as expected, they picked up on many more points for improvement. They ticked four 'some evidence' boxes and six 'clear evidence' boxes with two in the middle of both. This was positive as we knew the teachers feedback would be most important and most of the boxes ticked were 'clear evidence'. Our teacher repeated what had been said already with regards to the transistions and the titles, and also the steady shot when appropriate, however they also touched on some other points. These included we needed a close up of the poster, which we were unsure about as other documentarys we had looked at did not show a close up, however we will review the situation soon. Also it was made clear that when Jamie is driving the car, his voice needs to be made louder, which we can easily adjust when we are editing. The last piece of feedback to improve was the titles and how they are positioned, which yet again we were aware of and was waiting to get the font off of the internet and putting it in place towards the end of editing to finish off.
However there was some positives which were taken out of this as our teacher felt the music 'works well' and is 'effective', which we felt too and are very happy with.
Overall we feel the rough cut feedback has given us some much needed information and guidance, and we believe we now know what we need to do in order to complete our production and to hopefully improve it.
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
Feedback notes
Connor, Andrew
The sound quality needs some fine-tuning to get rid of the crackling and get the audio levels set
Consider an ‘older sounding’ voice over to fit the conventions of the documentary
Consider experimenting with different sound effects for the CCTV footage and applying a time code or date (as a title for each of the cameras)
Consider re-shooting some of the footage in the room to get a smooth pan
Consider getting some more shots in the car of cutaways of hands and side profile of Jamie
The sound quality needs some fine-tuning to get rid of the crackling and get the audio levels set
Consider an ‘older sounding’ voice over to fit the conventions of the documentary
Consider experimenting with different sound effects for the CCTV footage and applying a time code or date (as a title for each of the cameras)
Consider re-shooting some of the footage in the room to get a smooth pan
Consider getting some more shots in the car of cutaways of hands and side profile of Jamie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)